Module 5 - Points to Ponder

Submitted For

💡

Please share your comments on 2 of the following Points to Ponder questions. (Choose 2 of the questions below.)

Allows you to create your designs with a full and concrete understanding of the site context.
Makes it easier for both the designer and for the clients to understand how the proposed addition/renovation relates to the existing structure.
Easy to reference previously used materials and other relevant building information

working to avoid making non-demolition alterations to phases that have already been constructed or exist already during the design process of future phases.
ensuring temporal unity between design elements that you desire to be a part of the same phase
ensuring that all the relevant views, elevations, sections, etc. are displaying information within the same temporal phase

As the phases advance, the interfaces between the buildings can either be demolished or altered to permit movement between existing phases, and newly constructed phases.

How can you plan and prepare for these complexities as your create your initial building model?

The best way to plan and prepare for these complexities is to sort and organize all your views and plans into the project phases you have determined before you begin adding any new elements. This will ensure that the base elements of each view is identical. When adding elements for a particular phase, ensure that you have toggled to the correct time frame within the correct view so that the changes you are making do not affect established designs in previous phases.

Using a single building model of existing conditions as the foundation for modeling different proposed design alternatives for a portion of a given building allow designers to have creative flexibility without necessitating the creation of multiple models and thus compromising design accuracy and clarity. With a singular model that contains adjustable options for a given design or series of design elements, clients are able to directly compare proposals with ease.

creating a separate model for each of the design alternatives is not only incredibly resource intensive, as it requires additional time to create the individual models, but is also elevates the risk of inconsistencies between the static/non-alternating elements of the design proposal. It can be difficult to ensure that multiple separate models are identical where needed, especially for complex designs.

For my project, the features of my proposed design that I chose to model as design alternatives were the roofing for the dining atrium space, and the interior furnishing/decor of the ground floor level of the central atrium.

Why did you choose these building features? And what were the biggest challenges in modeling them as the design alternatives?

I chose the roofing feature of the dining atrium space because I thought that lighting preferences for clients can vary significantly. So by providing options for a roof that can either be partially glass or entirely composed of glass, and can allow clients more control over how much sunlight they desire to have within a space, an aesthetic choice which in turn affects heating and climate control related costs.
I chose to provide alternative furnishing proposals for the central atrium space in order to exemplify the dynamic spatial program that the particularly design of the space affords. I wanted to demonstrate to the clients that the atrium is not just a site for circulation between the different spaces, but it can also function as a destination space itself, either for leisure and relaxation, or studying for those who enjoy environments with ambient-noise.